High Court Urged to Reject White House Appeal to Keep Abuse Photos Secret

Friday 11 September 2009

by: Jason Leopold, t r u t h o u t | Report

http://www.truthout.org/091109A

     The American Civil Liberties Union asked the 
US Supreme Court this week to deny a request by 
the Obama administration to review and, if 
justices take up the case, reverse a lower 
court's ruling ordering the government to comply 
with a Freedom of Information Act request and 
release more than four dozen photos depicting US 
soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan abusing 
prisoners.

     The group's 37-page opposition was supported 
by friend-of-the-court briefs filed by Human 
Rights Watch, the International Center for 
Transitional Justice and Amnesty International 
and another filed by the Reporters Committee for 
Freedom of the Press and 16 media organizations. 
The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act 
lawsuit in 2003 to gain access to the images.

     "These photos may be profoundly disturbing, 
but they are a crucial part of the historical 
record and the appeals court was right to find 
that they should be released," said Jameel 
Jaffer, director of the ACLU National Security 
Project. "It's disappointing that the Obama 
administration, which in other contexts has 
recognized the close connection between 
transparency and accountability, is continuing to 
argue that the photos should be suppressed."

     But even if the court refuses to take up the 
case, President Barack Obama has vowed to 
continue to suppress the images.

     Obama sent a letter July 29 to Sens. Joe 
Lieberman and Lindsey Graham informing them that 
he would work with Congress to ensure legislation 
is passed that would block the release of the 
photographs.

     The disclosure was made in a footnote in a 
33-page petition the Obama administration filed 
last month with the US Supreme Court. Neither the 
White House nor spokespeople for Lieberman and 
Graham responded to phone calls and email queries 
seeking a copy of the letter.

     The petition confirms that the contents of 
the 44 images at issue includes one in which a 
female solider pointed a broom at one detainee 
"as if I was sticking the end of a broom stick 
into [his] rectum."

     Other photos at issue show US soldiers 
pointing guns at the heads of hooded and bound 
detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. The filing 
also notes that the detainee abuse was 
investigated by the US Army's Criminal 
Investigation Division and "three of the six 
investigations led to criminal charges and in two 
of those cases, the accused were found guilty and 
punished."

     In June, the Senate unanimously passed the 
Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 
2009, an amendment to the supplemental 
appropriations spending bill sponsored by 
Lieberman and Graham. The House of 
Representatives referred the amendment to two 
House committees on June 18 where it is pending.

     Additionally, on July 9, the Senate 
unanimously passed the amendment again as it was 
attached to the Department of Homeland Security 
appropriations bill.

     "The President recently informed the sponsors 
of the pending detainee photograph legislation 
that he 'support[s] this legislation' and 'will 
work with Congress to get it passed,'" says the 
footnote in the Supreme Court petition prepared 
by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, quoting from 
Obama's July 29 letter to Lieberman and Graham.

     The bill has faced opposition in the House 
and that may explain why the Obama administration 
has decided to appeal to the US Supreme Court if 
the House kills the measure altogether

     Lieberman (I-Connecticut) and Graham (R-South 
Carolina) were sharply critical of Obama's 
decision not to fight a final ruling in March by 
the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 
that called upon the Department of Defense to 
release the photographs. Obama indicated he would 
abide by that decision, but he abruptly shifted 
his stance after he was publicly criticized by 
the likes of Dick Cheney and Cheney's daughter, 
Liz.

     Lieberman and Graham's amendment would 
authorize the Secretary of Defense to prohibit 
the release of the abuse photographs and videos 
for three years and renew it for three-year 
intervals thereafter. The Obama administration 
would, presumably, drop its appeal if the House 
passes the legislation when it returns from its 
summer break in September.

     In June, Graham said during a floor speech, 
before the appropriations spending bill was 
passed, that White House Chief of Staff Rahm 
Emanuel assured him that the abuse photographs 
would never "see the light of day" and would sign 
an executive order if the Supreme Court refuses 
to take up the case or rule in favor of the 
administration if it decides to hear the appeal 
or if Congress does not pass legislation banning 
the disclosure of the images.

     "I wanted to be assured by the administration 
that if the Congress fails to do its part to 
protect these photos from being released, the 
President would sign an Executive order which 
would change their classification to be 
classified national security documents that would 
be outcome determinative of the lawsuit," Graham 
said on June 17. "Rahm Emanuel has indicated to 
me that the President is committed to not ever 
letting these photos see the light of day, but 
they agree with me that the best way to do it is 
for Congress to act."

     Obama had originally decided to release the 
photos because the administration did not believe 
the Supreme Court would take the case.

     At a press briefing on April 24, White House 
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters, "the 
Department of Justice [had] decided based on the 
[Second Circuit's] ruling that it was hopeless to 
appeal."

     Gibbs's comment came a day after acting US 
attorney Lev Dassin confirmed in a letter filed 
with US District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein 
that the Obama administration would not challenge 
the Second Circuit's decision.

     But in May, following the long-awaited 
release of Bush administration torture memos that 
Republicans and former Bush officials sharply 
criticized, the Obama administration changed its 
position and said it would fight to keep the 
photographs secret, fearing that releasing it 
would stoke anti-American sentiment in the Middle 
East and put the lives of US soldiers at greater 
risk.

     Obama's decision to fight to conceal the 
photos to the Supreme Court marks an about-face 
on the open-government policies that he 
proclaimed during his first days in office.

     On January 21, Obama signed an executive 
order instructing all federal agencies and 
departments to "adopt a presumption in favor" of 
Freedom of Information Act requests and promised 
to make the federal government more transparent.

     "The Government should not keep information 
confidential merely because public officials 
might be embarrassed by disclosure, because 
errors and failures might be revealed, or because 
of speculative or abstract fears," Obama's order 
said. "In responding to requests under the FOIA, 
executive branch agencies should act promptly and 
in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such 
agencies are servants of the public."

     But in the Supreme Court petition Solicitor 
General Kagan filed Friday, the administration 
argued that a specific provision of FOIA allows 
the withholding of information if it threatens 
the lives of individuals.

     The petition says that the Second Circuit 
Court of Appeals ruled that FOIA "mandates the 
public disclosure of such photographs - 
regardless of the risk to American lives - 
because FOIA Exemption 7(F) requires the 
government to 'identify at least one individual 
with reasonable specificity' and show that 
disclosure 'could reasonably be expected to 
endanger that individual.'"

     Kagan wrote that the Second Circuit Court of 
Appeals misinterpreted the law when it ruled that 
the government had to identify specific 
individuals who would be harmed by the disclosure 
of the photographs

     The Obama administration argued that 
Exemption 7(F), "is inconsistent with the text of 
Exemption 7(F), which broadly encompasses danger 
to 'any individual,' with no suggestion of the 
court's extra-textual requirement of victim 
specificity. The history of drafting that 
exemption "underscores that conclusion. Congress 
did not mean for public disclosure of agency 
records to trump the life and physical safety of 
individuals - particularly in a case such as 
this, in which the government has already made 
public the underlying investigative reports 
revealing all relevant allegations of wrongdoing 
and the associated investigative conclusions."

     "The President and the United States military 
fully recognize that certain photographs at issue 
depict reprehensible conduct by American 
personnel and warranted disciplinary action," the 
brief states. "There are neither justifications 
nor excuses for such conduct by members of the 
military. But the fact remains that public 
disclosure of the photographs could reasonably be 
expected to endanger the lives and physical 
safety of individuals engaged in the Nation's 
military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The 
photographs therefore are exempt from mandatory 
disclosure under FOIA. Review by this Court is 
warranted to give effect to Exemption 7(F) and 
the protection it affords to the personnel whose 
lives and physical safety would be placed at risk 
by disclosure."

     The ACLU said in its opposition brief that 
the Obama administration's "argument here would 
turn FOIA on its head by affording the greatest 
protection from disclosure to records that depict 
the worst governmental misconduct."

     The Obama administration's arguments against 
disclosure are not that much different from the 
Bush administration's, and have, as the ACLU 
noted, been rejected by Second Circuit Court of 
Appeals. The appeals court said threats needed to 
be specific in order to justify withholding 
information.

     The appeals court also shot down the Bush 
administration's attempt to radically expand FOIA 
exemptions for withholding the photos, stating 
that the Bush administration had attempted to use 
the FOIA exemptions as "an all-purpose damper on 
global controversy" and "an alternative 
classification mechanism."

     "It is plainly insufficient to claim that 
releasing documents could reasonably be expected 
to endanger some unspecified member of a group so 
vast as to encompass all United States troops, 
coalition forces, and civilians in Iraq and 
Afghanistan," the appeals court panel of judges 
ruled.

     The appeals court further deemed the Bush 
administration's position legally flawed and 
added that releasing "the photographs is likely 
to further the purposes of the Geneva Conventions 
by deterring future abuse of prisoners."

     Last September, in upholding a lower court 
ruling ordering the release of the photos, the 
appeals court noted that past US administrations 
had championed the release of photos that showed 
prisoners of war being abused and tortured.

     Notably, after World War II, the US 
government publicized photos of prisoners in 
Japanese and German prisons and concentration 
camps, which the court noted, "showed emaciated 
prisoners, subjugated detainees, and even 
corpses. But the United States championed the use 
of the photos as a means of holding the 
perpetrators accountable."

     The petition heavily recycles the Bush 
administration's legal arguments and includes a 
previous sworn declaration from the likes of 
former Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers 
warning that releasing the photographs to the 
ACLU would threaten national security and could 
lead to the deaths of American servicemen and 
women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

     In it's opposition brief filed with the 
Supreme Court, the ACLU contends that granting 
the Obama administration's petition "would only 
serve to further delay the disclosure of 
information that is of extraordinary interest to 
the public and of crucial importance to the 
ongoing national discussion about the abuse of 
prisoners in US custody overseas."

ยป

Jason Leopold is editor in chief of The Public 
Record, 
<http://www.pubrecord.org>www.pubrecord.org.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
[email protected] OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to